A 5.0 Liter, Ethanol injected turbo confirmed?

[FoxFour]

UPDATE: More news on Ford's forthcoming ethanol injected, turbocharged "Bobcat" V8

Seems like this 'Bobcat' V-8 could offer Diesel-like torque through some clever engineering. This concept could be used on the other 'Ecoboost' models as well. The Internal Combustion engine ain't dead yet.

 

[JasonFC]

WOW. Very cool stuff indeed.. Ford does have a bright future.

 

[Stroszek]

The Internal Combustion engine ain't dead yet.

It seems we're only now realizing it's potential through Ford's endeavors.

 

[fiveoh2go]

UPDATE: More news on Ford's forthcoming ethanol injected, turbocharged "Bobcat" V8

 

[Jroc]

Sounds like a pretty cool idea to me!

5 liters of turbocharged, direct injection, V8 FTW!

 

[Jroc]

It says direct Ethanol injection. Is the gasoline direct injection also?

 

[SkeetSkeetSkeet]

It says direct Ethanol injection. Is the gasoline direct injection also?

Apparently yes.

"5.0-liter V8 with gasoline port injection and turbocharging. A second set of direct injectors is used to feed a small amount of ethanol directly to the cylinders"

Both a gasoline and ethanol injector per each cylinder.

 

[meaty mac]

It's like Ecoboost on Steroids :bowdown:

 

[03cobra#694]

This is big torque.

BMEP is a measure of specific output of an engine independent of displacement. That BMEP of 27 BAR in a 3.5-liter V6 translates to a torque output of 553 lb-ft. Compare this to 350 lb-ft from a standard 3.5-liter Ecoboost and you know good things are on the way. Specifically, the 5.0-liter Bobcat can produce over 500 hp and 750 lb-ft of torque. That's the kind of torque number typically associated with big diesel engines and handily beats the 650 lb-ft of the 6.4-liter diesel currently offered in the Super Duty pickups.

 

[WireEater]

Wow, that thing can pull.

 

[blainestang]

Apparently yes.

"5.0-liter V8 with gasoline port injection and turbocharging. A second set of direct injectors is used to feed a small amount of ethanol directly to the cylinders"

Both a gasoline and ethanol injector per each cylinder.

Actually, that says that the gasoline is PORT injection.

Gasoline = Port Injection
Ethanol = Direct Injection

 

[Tampa03cobra]

The future is in turbocharging, it's the only power adder that harnesses wasted energy!

 

[mc01svt]

whats taking so long for new tech to get to market? This is just a rehash of old ideas. :bash:

Electronic fuel injection has been in production since the 80's. Its been nearly 30yrs and engines haven't changed much at all. If fact, mazda has been using direct injection for 5+yrs and its just now spilling over to lincoln. :dw:

 

[mc01svt]

The future is in turbocharging, it's the only power adder that harnesses wasted energy!

we're going nowhere fast. Turbos have been around since forever. And they add a good $1000 to the price of an engine compared to NA. I'd rather see lightweight camless NA motor with D.I. and high compression. Valves can be actuated electronically or pneumatically. Its been done before, no idea why we are still sticking to 19th century principles of engine design. :bash:

 

[Blk04Snake]

Sounds like a great idea to me. Diesels are cool and I want one, but sounds like this can be done at a much lower cost, and better power and mileage too!

 

[blainestang]

we're going nowhere fast. Turbos have been around since forever. And they add a good $1000 to the price of an engine compared to NA. I'd rather see lightweight camless NA motor with D.I. and high compression. Valves can be actuated electronically or pneumatically. Its been done before, no idea why we are still sticking to 19th century principles of engine design. :bash:

Sure turbos cost money... but so do electronically and pneumatically operated valvetrains.

Sometimes (maybe more like OFTEN) "low-tech" solutions are the most cost-effective.

Consider the 99-04 GT's. They're pretty "low-tech", but for the ~$20k you would have paid to buy a new one, good luck finding a "high tech" N/A 4 or 6 that made as much power for a similar price.

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

whats taking so long for new tech to get to market? This is just a rehash of old ideas. :bash:

Electronic fuel injection has been in production since the 80's. Its been nearly 30yrs and engines haven't changed much at all. If fact, mazda has been using direct injection for 5+yrs and its just now spilling over to lincoln. :dw:

Who cares how old the tech is. Tell me when was the last production car to get numbers as impressive as this? When you can make numbers such as this in a truly efficient manner than I'd say it justifies the means by which you accomplished it.

Or do you just insist on dogging anything that comes out of a Ford factory? I dont think I've ever seen you make a positive comment on anything unless it has a G8 badge on it. If that's what you think is great engineering that people want than I surely hope Ford doesn't follow your example. It will only lead them the way of GM.

Turbocharging may be very old technology but to the average ignorant public it isn't. People associate turbocharging with more cutting edge higher end vehicles. They know nothing about the Veyron but when they read about it they see the price tag and the 16 cylinder quad turbo 1001hp engine. Just look at how Acura marketed the RDX with its 2.0l turbo motor like its supposed to be something high tech and special when it isn't.

The bottom line is that consumers like a car that is turbocharged or supercharged even if they dont even know what it is or what it looks like. When you're in the business of selling cars then it would be smart to use technologies that can be easily explained in commercials and ads that get the consumer excited about your product.

Ford has done good by latching onto turbos and DI. With just the little bit of exposure its had the brand is now perceived as a company that is moving forward instead of sticking with old tech like GM has eventhough it works.

 

[GTSpartan]

Ford has done good by latching onto turbos and DI. With just the little bit of exposure its had the brand is now perceived as a company that is moving forward instead of sticking with old tech like GM has eventhough it works.

FWIW, GM had a DI, tubocharged car on the market before Ford. The Ecotech (sounds just like ecoboost) turbo in the Cobalt SS.

 

[blainestang]

FWIW, GM had a DI, tubocharged car on the market before Ford. The Ecotech (sounds just like ecoboost) turbo in the Cobalt SS.

I think the point is that Ford has been actively promoting specifically the engines and the technology involved with regard to both performance and efficiency.

Others have used it (Mazdas 2.3 came before the LNF Ecotec (no "h") in the Sky/Solstice/Cobalt), but Ford has taken it the next step by making a FAMILY of engines based around the technology and actively promoted it.

In the case of the Ecotec engines from GM, there have been plenty of other non-turbocharged and/or non-DI engines in that family of engines. For instance, the Cavalier used Ecotec engines that were neither turbocharged OR DI, and all the Cobalts (including the supercharged SS) have used Ecotec engines... none of which were turbocharged OR direct injection until the 2008 Cobalt SS.

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

FWIW, GM had a DI, tubocharged car on the market before Ford. The Ecotech (sounds just like ecoboost) turbo in the Cobalt SS.

Im not saying it's anything new but to the public it is perceived as advanced engineering and newer technology.

What Ford is doing well is providing a good package around the new powertrains and providing marketing that is getting the attention of the consumer. Like I said, people like turbocharged cars even if they dont know anything about them so what Ford is doing with their new turbocharged motors is a win for everybody